Ranchers.net Bull Session     Ranchers.net Bull Session
Log in Register Ranchers.net Ranchers.net's Bull Session Forum Index FAQ Memberlist Search

Three more cases of CWD found in wild deer ALBERTA
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Ranchers.net's Bull Session Forum Index -> Bull Session
Author Message
Oldtimer
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21972
Location: Northeast Montana

PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Big Muddy rancher wrote:


To bad your not going to the convention. You might have come back informed. Wink


Oh don't worry Big Muddy-- there will be enough there to get the info and get it back to everyone...Some from around here are looking at going- and I'll be sure to get it back to you Canucks....Wouldn't want you folks up there remaining in the dark forever...Too bad Canada doesn't have any organizations to inform the producers of the little things-- like the fact SRM's are still going into Canadian feed Wink Laughing Laughing


Back to top
Tam
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 5525
Location: Sask

PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldtimer wrote:
Big Muddy rancher wrote:


To bad your not going to the convention. You might have come back informed. Wink


Oh don't worry Big Muddy-- there will be enough there to get the info and get it back to everyone...Some from around here are looking at going- and I'll be sure to get it back to you Canucks....Wouldn't want you folks up there remaining in the dark forever...Too bad Canada doesn't have any organizations to inform the producers of the little things-- like the fact SRM's are still going into Canadian feed :wink: Laughing Laughing


Surprize Surprize another Oldtimer Canadian industry discrediting comment with a hit of US industry smug superiority tossed it for good measure. Rolling Eyes You might be interested in knowing that our beef organizations are busy informing everyone that although some of this stuff was allowed in some animal feed but NOT CATTLE FEED in Canada in the past, as of JUNE 2006 it is no longer. And if we want to prove we are serious about cleaning up our industry we would like to see full compliance before the Government deadline. Now how long do you think it will be before your beef organizations will be informing your Beef raisers and Feed manufacturers that SRM's are not allowed by law in ALL US FEED? Wink


Back to top
Oldtimer
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 21972
Location: Northeast Montana

PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 5:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Tam wrote:


You might be interested in knowing that our beef organizations are busy informing everyone that although some of this stuff was allowed in some animal feed but NOT CATTLE FEED in Canada in the past, as of JUNE 2006 it is no longer.


But you have a year to noncomply without any restriction/penalty Rolling Eyes

And your group forgot to tell old Bill Wink Laughing


Back to top
Sandhusker
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 17445
Location: Nebraska

PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Big Muddy rancher wrote:
Sandhusker wrote:
Hanta Yo wrote:
Quote:
R-CALF is the laughing stock, but the Secretary of the USDA ASKS to come to our convention.... yeah, that makes sense.


It DOES make sense, USDA wanting to calm everyone down. Quit looking down your nose, there are other groups they talk to whether they have to ask or are invited. Apparently you R-Calfers never invited USDA. It is their duty to inform (whether you believe it or not)

Thanks, flounder, I've copied what you posted and put in Word so I can read carefully what you posted. Looks to me some damning information to (we know who they are).


Maybe they'll inform us how a feed ban can be effective when positives show up years after it is declared "effective"

Maybe they'll inform us what "low" means.

Maybe they'll tell us what the difference was between BSE case #23 and the previous 22 was that necessitated a change of policy.

Maybe they'll tell us why they want to expand trade with a country that doesn't even fit into the "minimal risk" category that they invented for that country.

Maybe they'll tell us why private BSE testing isn't sound science, but hormone free is.

Maybe they'll tell us why they tell the world trade has to be based on a 30 month age cutoff, but then negotiate a 20 month deal with Japan.

There's a lot of things they need to tell us, Hanta.



To bad your not going to the convention. You might have come back informed. Wink


Why don't you give a stab at anwering those quetions, BMR? I don't think you can.


Back to top
Sandhusker
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 17445
Location: Nebraska

PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 6:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bill, "Sorry I had to leave last night Sandhusker. It looks like it must have been a sleepless night for you knowing how foolish you and your fellow Klan members appear. You guys sure had some balls though in asking flounder to supply years of research and then dump him when he does the proper thing and refused to focus solely on Canada."


flounder: Quote:
your welcome there big muddy. don't think for one minute i am singling Canada out as being worse off than the USA in Terms of TSEs. I just think that any country in the shape of Canada or USA should adhere to the BSE GBR risk assessments and old trade protocols (which i said years ago should be changed to include all TSE in all species), as opposed to GWs and the OIEs BSE MRR policy, which allows all strains of TSE to be traded legally, and globally$ there is absolutely nothing that is science-based about that damn BSE MRR policy. This is what sank my battleship in regards to testifying for r-calf. they actually appoached me about it, but i told them i would be glad to testify, but i was not stopping at the Canadian border, my testimony was to come south as well if given the opportunity. and that ended that, but i did supply them with a load of data, for whatever that was worth. this BSE MRR policy set the erradication of BSE globally back to where it started, square one $$$ this BSE MRR policy should be repealed and the BSE GBR risk assessments strengthened to include ALL TSE in ALL SPECIES. ...TSS

R-CALF did what any participant in a lawsuit would do with a potential witness like Terry. He planned on turning the witness stand into a soapbox for his personal agenda, he admits as much in his post. I applaud him for his honesty and respect him for being straight up about his intentions. However, what some of you straw grabbers can't comprehend is that ANY legal team on ANY trial on ANY case would not include a person like that in their battery, regardless of any factual content. Chances are his testimony would be counter productive as his credibilty might be questioned due to tangenting off. The jurors/judge would discount his testimony as they would easily recognize he was there to talk about something else.

You guys want to try again?


Back to top
flounder
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 03 Sep 2005
Posts: 1984
Location: TEXAS

PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 8:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sandhusker wrote:
Bill, "Sorry I had to leave last night Sandhusker. It looks like it must have been a sleepless night for you knowing how foolish you and your fellow Klan members appear. You guys sure had some balls though in asking flounder to supply years of research and then dump him when he does the proper thing and refused to focus solely on Canada."


flounder: Quote:
your welcome there big muddy. don't think for one minute i am singling Canada out as being worse off than the USA in Terms of TSEs. I just think that any country in the shape of Canada or USA should adhere to the BSE GBR risk assessments and old trade protocols (which i said years ago should be changed to include all TSE in all species), as opposed to GWs and the OIEs BSE MRR policy, which allows all strains of TSE to be traded legally, and globally$ there is absolutely nothing that is science-based about that damn BSE MRR policy. This is what sank my battleship in regards to testifying for r-calf. they actually appoached me about it, but i told them i would be glad to testify, but i was not stopping at the Canadian border, my testimony was to come south as well if given the opportunity. and that ended that, but i did supply them with a load of data, for whatever that was worth. this BSE MRR policy set the erradication of BSE globally back to where it started, square one $$$ this BSE MRR policy should be repealed and the BSE GBR risk assessments strengthened to include ALL TSE in ALL SPECIES. ...TSS

R-CALF did what any participant in a lawsuit would do with a potential witness like Terry. He planned on turning the witness stand into a soapbox for his personal agenda, he admits as much in his post. I applaud him for his honesty and respect him for being straight up about his intentions. However, what some of you straw grabbers can't comprehend is that ANY legal team on ANY trial on ANY case would not include a person like that in their battery, regardless of any factual content. Chances are his testimony would be counter productive as his credibilty might be questioned due to tangenting off. The jurors/judge would discount his testimony as they would easily recognize he was there to talk about something else.

You guys want to try again?


sandhusker, the facts spoke for themselves, there is nothing to try again about, fact is, i gave them the facts, and they chose to ignore the parts that did not support there agenda. end of story. you can try to discredit me all you want, but you cannot change the facts. for gods sake, i have no agenda except the truth, i have given you most of it, you choose to ignore it. the only thing i am vested in, is the truth and for that, r-calf chose not to subpoena me, because i was coming south of the border with those facts, and they knew it, end of story. now, go back and ask those attorneys what they want you to say now Wink im ready.....tss


Back to top
Sandhusker
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 17445
Location: Nebraska

PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 8:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Terry, I'm not trying to discredit you in any way. Read what I said again. NO attorney representing ANY client for ANY case would use a witness if they knew that witness was planning on going on a tangent.


Back to top
flounder
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 03 Sep 2005
Posts: 1984
Location: TEXAS

PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sandhusker wrote:
Terry, I'm not trying to discredit you in any way. Read what I said again. NO attorney representing ANY client for ANY case would use a witness if they knew that witness was planning on going on a tangent.



even if it was the truth, with the facts handed to them on a silver platter ???

you may be correct, and sadly, we both loose. ...tss


P.S.

don't feel bad there sandhusker, your not the first one that took that road and tried to discredit me or call me a flunky.
hell, it happens all the time. here is a link to some other folks that think the same thing. except this really cracks me up, they link up an article in a peer review medical journal that i wrote years ago, that proved later to be true. go figure ;-)

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/article_detail.cfm/article/138


TSS


Back to top
Sandhusker
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 17445
Location: Nebraska

PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Terry, what gives you the idea that I'm trying to discredit you?


Back to top
flounder
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 03 Sep 2005
Posts: 1984
Location: TEXAS

PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 8:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Volume 12, Number 12–December 2006


PERSPECTIVE

On the Question of Sporadic

or Atypical Bovine SpongiformEncephalopathy and

Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease

Paul Brown,* Lisa M. McShane,† Gianluigi Zanusso,‡ and Linda Detwiler§

Strategies to investigate the possible existence of sporadic

bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) require

systematic testing programs to identify cases in countries

considered to have little or no risk for orally acquired disease,

or to detect a stable occurrence of atypical cases in

countries in which orally acquired disease is disappearing.

To achieve 95% statistical confidence that the prevalence

of sporadic BSE is no greater than 1 per million (i.e., the

annual incidence of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease

[CJD] in humans) would require negative tests in 3 million

randomly selected older cattle. A link between BSE and

sporadic CJD has been suggested on the basis of laboratory

studies but is unsupported by epidemiologic observation.

Such a link might yet be established by the discovery

of a specific molecular marker or of particular combinations

of trends over time of typical and atypical BSE and various

subtypes of sporadic CJD, as their numbers are influenced

by a continuation of current public health measures that

exclude high-risk bovine tissues from the animal and

human food chains.


SNIP...




Sporadic CJD
The possibility that at least some cases of apparently sporadic CJD might be due to infection by sporadic cases of BSE cannot be dismissed outright. Screening programs needed to identify sporadic BSE have yet to be implemented, and we know from already extant testing programs that at least a proportion of infected animals have no symptoms and thus would never be identified in the absence of systematic testing. Thus, sporadic BSE (or for that matter, sporadic disease in any mammalian species) might be occurring on a regular basis at perhaps the same annual frequency as sporadic CJD in humans, that is, in the range of 1 case per million animals.

Whether humans might be more susceptible to atypical forms of BSE cannot be answered at this time. Experimentally transmitted BASE shows shorter incubation periods than BSE in at least 1 breed of cattle, bovinized transgenic mice, and Cynomolgus monkeys (12,13). In humanized transgenic mice, BASE transmitted, whereas typical BSE did not transmit (13). Paradoxically, the other major phenotype (H) showed an unusually long incubation period in bovinized transgenic mice (12).

The limited experimental evidence bearing on a possible relationship between BSE and sporadic CJD is difficult to interpret. The original atypical BASE strain of BSE had a molecular protein signature very similar to that of 1 subtype (type 2 M/V) of sporadic CJD in humans (5). In another study, a strain of typical BSE injected into humanized mice encoding valine at codon 129 showed a glycopattern indistinguishable from the same subtype of sporadic CJD (15). In a third study, the glycopatterns of both the H and L strains of atypical BSE evidently did not resemble any of the known sporadic CJD subtypes (12).

To these molecular biology observations can be added the epidemiologic data accumulated during the past 30 years. The hypothesis that at least some cases of apparently sporadic CJD are due to unrecognized BSE infections cannot be formally refuted, but if correct, we might expect by now to have some epidemiologic evidence linking BSE to at least 1 cluster of apparently sporadic cases of CJD. Although only a few clusters have been found (and still fewer published), every proposed cluster that has been investigated has failed to show any common exposure to bovines. For that matter, no common exposure has been shown to any environmental vehicles of infection, including the consumption of foodstuffs from bovine, ovine, and porcine sources, the 3 livestock species known to be susceptible to transmissible spongiform encephalopathies. Additional negative evidence comes from several large case-control studies in which no statistically significant dietary differences were observed between patients with sporadic CJD and controls (16,17).

On the other hand, the difficulty of establishing a link between BSE and CJD may be compounded by our ignorance of the infectious parameters of a sporadic form of BSE (e.g., host range, tissue distribution of infectivity, route of transmission, minimum infectious dose for humans, whether single or multiple). Presumably, these parameters would resemble those of variant CJD; that is, high infectivity central nervous system and lymphoreticular tissues of an infected cow find their way into products consumed by humans. Transmissions that might have occurred in the past would be difficult to detect because meat products are generally not distributed in a way that results in detectable geographic clusters.

Barring the discovery of a specific molecular signature (as in variant CJD), the most convincing clue to an association will come from the observation of trends over time of the incidence of typical and atypical BSE and of sporadic and variant CJD. With 4 diseases, each of which could have increasing, unchanging, or decreasing trends, there could be 81 (34) possible different combinations. However, it is highly likely that the trends for typical BSE and variant CJD will both decrease in parallel as feed bans continue to interrupt recycled contamination. The remaining combinations are thus reduced to 9 (32), and some of them could be highly informative.

For example, if the incidence of atypical BSE declines in parallel with that of typical BSE, its candidacy as a sporadic form of disease would be eliminated (because sporadic disease would not be influenced by current measures to prevent oral infection). If, on the other hand, atypical BSE continues to occur as typical BSE disappears, this would be a strong indication that it is indeed sporadic, and if in addition at least 1 form of what is presently considered as sporadic CJD (such as the type 2 M/V subtype shown to have a Western blot signature like BASE) were to increase, this would suggest (although not prove) a causal relationship (Figure 5).

Recognition of the different forms of BSE and CJD depends upon continuing systematic testing for both bovines and humans, but bovine testing will be vulnerable to heavy pressure from industry to dismantle the program as the commercial impact of declining BSE cases ceases to be an issue. Industry should be aware, however, of the implications of sporadic BSE. Its occurrence would necessitate the indefinite retention of all of the public health measures that exclude high-risk bovine tissues from the animal and human food chains, whereas its nonoccurrence would permit tissues that are now destroyed to be used as before, once orally acquired BSE has disappeared.



SNIP...




PLEASE READ FULL TEXT ;


http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/EID/vol12no12/06-0965.htm?s_cid=eid06_0965_e




3:00 Afternoon Refreshment Break, Poster and Exhibit Viewing in the Exhibit
Hall


3:30 Transmission of the Italian Atypical BSE (BASE) in Humanized Mouse

Models Qingzhong Kong, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Pathology, Case Western Reserve
University

Bovine Amyloid Spongiform Encephalopathy (BASE) is an atypical BSE strain
discovered recently in Italy, and similar or different atypical BSE cases
were also reported in other countries. The infectivity and phenotypes of
these atypical BSE strains in humans are unknown. In collaboration with
Pierluigi Gambetti, as well as Maria Caramelli and her co-workers, we have
inoculated transgenic mice expressing human prion protein with brain
homogenates from BASE or BSE infected cattle. Our data shows that about half
of the BASE-inoculated mice became infected with an average incubation time
of about 19 months; in contrast, none of the BSE-inoculated mice appear to
be infected after more than 2 years. ***These results indicate that BASE is
transmissible to humans and suggest that BASE is more virulent than
classical BSE in humans.

6:30 Close of Day One


http://www.healthtech.com/2007/tse/day1.asp




SEE STEADY INCREASE IN SPORADIC CJD IN THE USA FROM
1997 TO 2006. SPORADIC CJD CASES TRIPLED, with phenotype
of 'UNKNOWN' strain growing. ...


http://www.cjdsurveillance.com/resources-casereport.html



There is a growing number of human CJD cases, and they were presented last
week in San Francisco by Luigi Gambatti(?) from his CJD surveillance
collection.

He estimates that it may be up to 14 or 15 persons which display selectively
SPRPSC and practically no detected RPRPSC proteins.


http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/transcripts/1006-4240t1.htm


http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/06/transcripts/2006-4240t1.pdf


Full Text

Diagnosis and Reporting of Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease

Singeltary, Sr et al. JAMA.2001; 285: 733-734.



http://jama.ama-assn.org/


BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL



SOMETHING TO CHEW ON



BMJ



http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/319/7220/1312/b#EL2



BMJ



http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/320/7226/8/b#EL1



TSS




Last edited by flounder on Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:08 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Tam
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 10 Feb 2005
Posts: 5525
Location: Sask

PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oldtimer wrote:
Tam wrote:


You might be interested in knowing that our beef organizations are busy informing everyone that although some of this stuff was allowed in some animal feed but NOT CATTLE FEED in Canada in the past, as of JUNE 2006 it is no longer.


But you have a year to noncomply without any restriction/penalty Rolling Eyes

And your group forgot to tell old Bill Wink Laughing


How long will it take the US to comply, heck how long will it be before your industry will even pass such a law, let alone comply? We passed the Chicken crap thing in 1998 and you have yet to write that law have you? See what pointing the superior industry finger does Oldtimer? Until you can honestly claim to have a superior industry It may be in your best interest to refrain from commenting about the short coming of our industry. Remember it was your organization that said you couldn't afford to open the border until your industry was caught up with the Canadian industry's Safeguards. Meaning you are not superior to us but just the opposite!!!! Wink


Back to top
flounder
Rancher
Rancher


Joined: 03 Sep 2005
Posts: 1984
Location: TEXAS

PostPosted: Sat Jan 06, 2007 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sandhusker wrote:
Terry, what gives you the idea that I'm trying to discredit you?


Sandhusker wrote;


>>>Chances are his testimony would be counter productive as his credibilty might be questioned due to tangenting off. The jurors/judge would discount his testimony as they would easily recognize he was there to talk about something else. <<<


what else would i talk about but the facts, what i have been speaking of for almost a decade, of which R-CALF chose to ignore. ...TSS


Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Ranchers.net's Bull Session Forum Index -> Bull Session All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 




Powered by phpBB
Copyright © 2001-2010 Ranchers.net
All times are GMT - 6 Hours